The Title says everything.
Would You Get Your Sneakers Cleaned for $35 if Someone Picked Them up and Dropped Them off at Your Place within 2 to 3 Days?
Would you get your Sneakers cleaned for $35 if someone picked them up and dropped them off at your place within 2 to 3 days?
whatthehell on 21/02/2020 - 12:14
Last edited 24/02/2020 - 10:02
Last edited 24/02/2020 - 10:02
Poll Options
- 22Yes, I would.
- 677No, I wouldn't.
- 23The idea is outrageous.
- 22I would, at 25$.
Comments
- 1
- 2
I prefer the dishwasher.
Toothbrush
Kids.
"You want your pocket money?"@capslock janitor: Agreed! School is basically a concentration camp all that hard work for nothing!
/s
WALLET WIZZZZAAARRDDDDD
I'm concerned now. Are people really using their washing machine to wash their own shoes? I thought this was a joke.
Sure, unless they're nice shoes. Use a wash bag or take out the laces.
Dishwasher water temp too high.
Surprisingly works well, I got lazy and threw my stinky bike helmet and that works too.
LoL bike helmet @ 1000rpm I don't think so mate.
I have a two minute shower in the washing machine. Lots of bubbles….
I used to wash mine in the front loader until the day I put them in with the dogs towel and the rubber sole rubbed up against the glass and the whole f****ing glass door exploded outwards because of the friction.
The shards of glass also ripped through the sliding door of the laundry cupboard opposite.. It was like armageddon in there.. Had to get a new washing machine! You can't make this shit up!
$35 sounds pretty good actually!
Put them in a pillowcase
We use pillow protectors instead as you can zip them close.
you can get replacement doors or even glass
I can't picture this happening..
Thanks for your contribution.
doesn't the sole glue fail after washing?
only if you set high temperature
Lol, Id just buy new ones
that's twice what I paid for my current pair
.
350% more than what I paid for my current pair
100% the wrong forum for this question/business model.
Yes and No, I guess. However it would still be interesting to see what people think.
Also, where should one post to get a better idea?
Sneaker forums probs. Maybe weChat?
Haha I would IF they are a reputable business, otherwise you may never see the sneakers again.
How would you confirm it was a reputable business?
For a start, do they have a shopfront, such as a clothes/shoes cleaning business or shoe repair etc.
Is there really a big enough market for dirty second hand sneakers that it would be worth scamming people to steal them?
Lol, great observation…
Pretty sure this was a Seinfeld episode.. Where Kramer convinced Jerry to have all his sneakers cleaned at the Mom and Pop store and they went missing and someone (Kramer?) thought it was a scam
no i wouldn't… i like cleaning my sneakers
So I'd have to walk barefoot/in my socks for 3 days?
People generally have more than 1 pair of shoes?
Who are these wealthy people?
Not wealthy, just not poor.
Perhaps get one shoe done at a time
Send one sneaker and hop for three days, then get the other one cleaned. Good training for the 30-mile Hop against St Antony's.
And also, do people actually say sneakers in Oz? Well I guess this is OzBargain where most people say "diapers" and "mom".
I barely hear it in speech, I wonder where it stems from…
I barely hear "sand shoes" in speech.
I do notice Shoes in both written and verbal though…. hmmm
If you’re American, fine otherwise lame. Should be on the citizenship test IMHO
Mum is English you twit. Mom is an Americanism.
@zwolf: The English word mum has been around for a lot longer than the American mom. I don't have a southern drawl, so mmmooorrrmmm doesn't really work.
@brendanm: And? I'm aware, and not saying it's more or less correct, unless you were to write one but intended it to indicate the pronunciation of the other. Also I don't know about 'morm', 'Marm' (ironically fairly English, that) would be closer to phonetically describing it.
Which is what I use, so what I write. Annnd full circle, huzzah!
@zwolf: I've never heard mom pronounced "marm". Not sure how an "o" can sound like "ar", it's not listed as such in anything I can find either.
@brendanm: Ah well, I said that in reply to your exaggerated example if it was said in the tenor of a wailing child with it's well drawn-out cadence. In such case I'd say it resembles that. But it's not too far.
Otherwise in daily usage I'd describe 'mom' as a softer, (less exaggerated) 'mahm'/'mahrm' with the H/R being quite soft.
I mean, it's definitely not "mowm" or anything similar overly stressing the O. Here's an example (and some luls): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mG4O9Ar2hE, 20 seconds in. Good chat.@zwolf: You should look up the phonetic sounds for "o". None I can find fit your description. First time I've had an in depth discussion about the pronunciation of mom, it's quite interesting.
@zwolf: But how do you think your pronunciation compares with other words with similar use of these vowels
eg tom, mop, mod, nom nom. vs mud, bum, rum, mug etcI think 'mum' sounds more like the 'u' words more than 'mom' sounds like the 'o' words.
Even with American pronunciation, the 'o' doesn't fit that precisely either. Trying to watch that Office clip and imagining them saying "Pam's mop" doesn't fit, while "Pam's marm" would actually work wellWhich is to say, the pronunciation isn't so obviously an 'o' that it makes much sense to reject the normal spelling for that reason. Nor should that necessarily matter anyway, because plenty of words aren't spelled out in a clear phonetic way. It's just one of the many wonders and delights of the English langwij.
And besides, we're notanimalsAmericans@crentist: It doesn't particularly matter what the ruling is on other words or instances; as an individual case, 'mom' is a word, the word Americans happen to use. And as written it represents when one moves their lips and that 'mahm' (as opposed to 'muhm') noise comes out. Comparing it to 'mop', 'bomb', whatever, is interesting but rules need not apply to every word without exception. I'd say this to be an odd & decent example, but it isn't alone in that regard.
Christ, I thought we were an easy-going bunch. For so many people to get their knickers in a twist (not you), per'aps I'm embodying the Aussie spirit more than the downvoters in this thread getting upset over such a non-issue. English or American, we ain't either, so does it matter which way we identify with on this matter? (I don't know anybody here who particularly cares for the Queen, despite whatever her official status with this country is..) Par Example, I've never had anybody call me out for saying "mom", but in writing it's the most offensive thing ever to choose that way it seems.
Reminds me of my teacher calling me out as a tot for saying "Zed" at the end of the alphabet. "We're not Americans, it's Zee!!"
"Wellll, I kind of like 'Zed' better lady." ("Zee's dead, baby" just doesn't 'ave the same ring to it.)Comparing it to 'mop', 'bomb', whatever, is interesting but rules need not apply to every word without exception.
This was the point of my last paragraph. Pronunciation and spelling aren't that strongly linked, so it doesn't make sense to use a foreign spelling of a word, and justify it based on pronunciation.
It doesn't particularly matter what the ruling is on other words or instances; as an individual case, 'mom' is a word, the word Americans happen to use
But words also relate to our own culture. It's nothing to do with the Queen or Britain vs USA. We use Australian English. I think people would care a bit about it because importing almost identical words adds nothing, but takes something away. And what that might say about Australian culture that we would change our own commonly used words to match the US, seemingly just for the sake of it.
Even then, the implication of of onetwothreefour's post was that this blending of language is common in casual communication. The joke is that we all know it's incorrect and lazy, but are easy-going enough to let it slip when convenient or whatever.You're being picked up on it for saying that you make a deliberate choice to adopt US spelling over Australian. This is not the usual careless easy-going convenience, and comes off a bit like devaluing Aus culture for the US.
And without the implications of cultural erosion it starts to come off almost a little pretentious, like asking someone to dîner instead of dinner. Like, you're making a point of doing so nearly identical that you may as well not bother, we got the exact word already.Which is also why this:
I've never had anybody call me out for saying "mom"
…makes no sense, because whatever difference there is in pronunciation is subtle enough that you'd have to really play up an American accent for anyone to realise that you were choosing not to use an Australian English word. But even in writing, you could keep using "mom" and no one would assume anything more than carelessness or whatever until you speak up and tell them it's deliberate.
@crentist: What is Australian-English? Seems to be just ripped from English-English entirely, unless you're talking about quasi-retarded slang words. Patriotism as a concept is bullshit.
If you're too dense to realize the difference between mum & mom as they are spoken, with link provided, then I really cannot help you.
Ugh. It's not a subtle difference at all.@zwolf: Australian English is whatever we are taught and use in Australia, doesn't really matter where it came from. It's not about patriotism or preventing a fluid and evolving language, it's about not making pointless changes to spelling due to a slight shift in the wind.
That video is of Americans who pronounce it with an 'o'. But there are other accents and Americans who don't pronounce it with an 'o'. They all spell it the same though, because that's how the word exists in their written language. Because again, pronunciation doesn't justify changing the spelling of a word and is simply bad spelling, depending on context.
The only real difference between mum/mom is where these spellings they have been commonly used, which makes choosing the one that hasn't been part of Australian English pretty plainly about cultural preference.
Unless you spell all your words phonetically, and this isn't just about using American words for the sake of it?quasi-retarded slang words
What is Australian-English?
Imagine being this far up your own behind and writing off 250 years of culture, not to mention the influence of thousands of years of indigenous languages.
I'm as far from a patriot as you get in Australia but I'll die on this hill. There's more culture wrapped up in a few words of the Australian language than your whole existence.
What else do you call sneakers?!
A group of people who sneak around.
Your mom
I only charge $10 to tie the shoelaces together and wrap them around power lines.
Do you charge more if it's a dangerous 'hood?
You dropped this
¯(ツ)/¯ '
matt3 actually dropped this:
¯(ツ)/¯
|neighbourI put a spike through it so it doesn't fall off again.
Don't forget you need to type "\\" on OzBargain for his right arm to show up. ¯\(ツ)/¯
Nope, max I would spend is $34.
Good on you for trying to be industrious.
I hope it succeeds but you need to put in more thought to the target market. Your market is probably <30yo. For the average <30yo to spend a discretionary extra $35, they will have to work an extra 2-3 hours.
It takes ~30 minutes to delace, strip in insole, clean and reassemble. Am I willing to go to work for 2-3 hours so someone else will clean my sneakers?
If you think many people would answer yes to the above, get to it and all the best.
2-3 hours? Wages are higher than that
Tax?
I guess 2 hours if you're on minimum wage post-tax
No way. Almost my entire shoe collection has been bought sub $50 per pair and it includes good brands and styles. Amazon has some amazing deals at times with their random pricing.
Not for me personally, but I can see how this would work. If it was say, five pairs and they were cleaned to a good standard.
I think if people are willing to spend that much on an expensive pair of sneakers to get them cleaned, there probably isn't a market of enough of these same people, who care, that would let said sneakers slip into a state that 'needed' a professional clean.
My running/sports shoes have the occasional trip through the washing machine followed by 2 - 3 days to dry thoroughly. Not sure why I'd want to pay someone $35 to take the washing machine step out of the equation for me?
It will be a Yes, if I had a large sneaker collection and if I had a number of them in rotation. Unfortunately (or fortunately), I'm not that much of a sneakerhead. I only have few sneakers Id like to keep clean, and I can DIY that.
no. most "ok" shoes cost around $140 and up. $35 for a clean is 25% the price.
thats like if your car costs $25000, u would spend $6250 for a one off clean.
I think OP is referring to fashion and collectible sneakers here, not your average runners or tennis shoes.
Some of the limited edition sneakers can cost you thousands. If you are able to spend that much on sneakers, spending $35 for a cleaning job is not out of the ordinary. Unfortunately for OP, I don't think there is a big sneaker culture here in Australia. This would be a good idea in USA though.
Exactly this. Most people would pay between $60-$170 for the shoes. No way they'd pay $35 just to clean them. Our society doesn't put sneakers on a pedestal like the US. Very very limited appeal for high end sneakers. Reminds me of a guy selling a toothpaste squeezer… $5 for a piece of plastic that squeezes the ends of toothpaste out of the tube. Moron didn't realise that you'd have to buy a carton of toothpaste just to get your money back from using it.
hm, I have a couple pairs over $1500 that are worth a $60 clean once a year or when I plan on reselling them
People wear second hand sneakers? Ew!
And pay $1000's :)
it's not the same thing at all. People will quite happily pay 25% of the price of a product that's in the $50-500 price range for maintenance. They won't do this as happily for things in the $25000 price range.
The question is do they have a better choice, Watch Batteries, Printer Ink, Screen Repair are examples of products people are willing to pay for because there isn't really a better option. Shoes I doubt people will pay.
Only if the business name was somewhat misleading like 'footjobs $35'
You can buy a new pair for less than $35 with OzBargain deals :D
Picked Them up and Dropped Them off
This might be the most expensive part of your value chain until you build sufficient scale, if ever.
How do you propose to do it?
On foot. Renewable energy source.
And to improve cost efficiency, pick the shoes up whilst barefoot and then wear the shoes to walk back…..
No wear and tear on couriers shoes = increased profit
I think the problem is that only people with expensive fashion sneakers would take up this service (I have several pairs of semi-expensive sports shoes, but don't give a rats how clean they are),
This sort of people who use this (eg sneaker collectors) are going to be fussy as how you will clean them, and possible damage risk. Would you trust your perfect $1,000 sneakers to some random??Unless you buy these
https://www.gucci.com/au/en_au/pr/women/shoes-for-women/trai…
I think this would only appeal to people who own valuable sneakers, not just expensive, but rare limited edition ones. If a person can afford to spend $$$ on a pair of regular expensive sneakers, they afford to buy a new pair. Unfortunately, the sneaker trend in Aust isn't that big compared to the US, nor we do get all the rare models , so the market is very very niche.
- 1
- 2
No, I have a washing machine.